M/S Progressive Construction L v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18285 of 2010 ======================================================
1. M/S Progressive Construction Ltd. Head Office-Raghava Block, 7th Floor Raghava Ratna Towers, Chirag Ali Lane, Hyderabad-500001 through its Administrative Officer Satyendra Roy
2. Satyendra Roy, son of Sri Ram Naresh Roy, Administrative Officer, Progressive Construction Ltd., Hyderabad, presently at N.H.-57, Jalalgarh, Purnea.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, New Delhi.
2. National Highways Authority of India, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, G-5 and 6, Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi110075.
3. General Manager, (E.W.III) National Highways Authority of India, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, G-5 and 6, Sector10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075.
4. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, P.I.U.- Araria at Purnea Shahiwan Hata Near Mahananda Colony, Purnea.
5. The Team Leader Span Consultant Pvt. Ltd. Purnea.
6. The Engineer, 4th and 5th Floor Mind Mill, Corporate Tower, Plot No.24A, Film City, Sector-16A, Noida-201301.
7. The State of Bihar
8. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Purnea.
9. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Araria.
10. Mines Inspector-cum-competent authority, Purnea and Araria at Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh For the Respondent nos.1to4: Mr. S.N.Pathak For the Respondent nos.7to9: Mr.J.P. Karn, AAG-IV Ranjan Kumar, AC to AAG-IV For the Respondent no.10 : Mr. Devendra Kumar Sinha, Sr.Adv. Mr.Rajendra Prasad, Spl.P.P. Mines ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2015 Heard the parties.
In view of the nature of grievances/claims raised on behalf of the petitioners in the present writ petition detailed in para 1 of the writ petition and discussed in the body of the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice shall be subserved, if the petitioners are granted liberty to file a
Patna High Court CWJC No.18285 of 2010 (6) dt.15-04-2015 comprehensive representation with all supporting documents before the respondent no.3, raising all the pleas, which have been raised in the present writ petition. It is ordered accordingly. If such a comprehensive representation is filed by the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today with a certified copy of the present order, then the respondent no.3 either himself or any other competent authority of the respondent National Highway Authority of India (respondent no.2) shall be obliged to consider and decide the claims raised on behalf of the petitioners strictly in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order at an early date preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of such comprehensive representation by the petitioners.
If on consideration of the materials, the competent authority, referred to above, comes to a conclusion that the claims raised on behalf of the petitioners are admissible to them, then the consequential orders shall also be issued for grant of such admissible claims without any unnecessary further delay. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claims raised on behalf of the petitioners in the present writ petition and the same is left to be decided by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law.
The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.
The interim order dated 15.11.2010 passed by a Bench of this Court stands vacated.
Arvind/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) U